NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/os/os2/advocacy/11363

Text File | 1993-01-01 | 3.5 KB | 80 lines

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,fido.os2
Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!itsmail1.hamilton.edu!jmalloy
From: [e-mail] (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: OS/2 bigot and NT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 22:34:40 GMT
Lines: 69

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>>
>> >Any comments? Stuffed disk? or more crippled software from MS?
>> >
>> >Steve
>> >
>> Well, yeah, it's crippled, I'm sure.  It's part of the Microsoft Evil
>> Plan for Total World Domination(TM) (also known as "Domination at your
>> Fingertips"(SM)) -- there's a hallucinogen that's released whenever you
>> try to boot NT; NT doesn't actually work (it's really OS/2 is disguise,
>> hence all your problems), but the drug usually makes users think they're
>> onto something New and Improved!  They're calling this their new "Drug
>> and Drop Technology"(R).
>>
>> I think Microsoft has a great future in releasing crippled software!
>> Look how far it's gotten IBM!
>>
>> Hey, it just occurs to me that IBM's stock hasn't really tumbled into
>> the pits, it's just more of the Microsoft Marketing Magic(SM) at work!
>>
>> [Note for the humor-impaired: note the impaired humor.]
>
>Har Har har.......
>
>I remember Windows refusing to intall with DR-DOS....now NT won't install with
>OS/2.....is that far-fetched for NT to not run on "unsupported" cpu's?

As far as I recall, you are quite wrong in claiming that Windows won't
install with DR-DOS; true, some people needed an update from DR (one
that was apparently available within days of the Windows 3.1 release), but
it's not like the two do not work together.  As for NT installing in the
presence of OS/2, it can be done (details on CIS, if I recall; Doug
Hamilton wrote up the procedure on BIX/WIX and it was also published in
his column in Windows Magazine, so it's not too hard to find.

Now, if you ask me, I sure wish both sides of this silly battle would at
least stop carping at each other, but then again, that's not likely.
I haven't tried NT yet (I've got the CD-ROMS, but no CD-ROM drive) but
there's even a remote chance that when I do finally install it, I might
actually be using OS/2 2.1 (if they can get OS/2 to support my video
board in something other than plain vanilla VGA and if its Windows
support is *much* improved over 2.0).  I don't want to battle the hard
disk just to try NT...

>I know this means I'm humour impaired.....but then yer post weren't really all
>*that* funny.....:-|.

Oy.  Everyone's a critic.  Of course it was funny!  It was limited only
by its, um, 'source.'  C'mon, you have to admit that it was at least as
funny as the rest of what passes for humor around these precincts...

>As for OS/2.....it runs very well on my machine and NT won't run at all. I'd
>hate to make predictions regarding MS stack values......they have been falling
>lately, haven't they?

Don't know; I don't own any MS or IBM stock (well, maybe indirectly via
retirement mutual funds over which I have no real control.  I just
increased my stack setting in config.sys.  :)i

>Stone-face Steve, the humourless Zygote from Hell.
>
What refreshing honesty!   (Is life really hell down there?  I heard it
was sorta nice...)

[e-mail]
!